Rick Kuhn, Henryk Grossman and the Recovery of Marxism. (Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 2007.)
In many ways, the second half of the title says it all: the recovery of Marxism.
Henryk Grossman (1881–1950) was a Marxist theorist and academic, who made an important contribution to the recognition and development of Marx’ economic theory. In addition, Kuhn’s biography is itself a recovery of both Grossman’s own analyses and consequently of Marxism as well.
Grossman was both a Marxist academic and a socialist activist. His life as a socialist to a very great extent mirrors the history of the socialist movement in his lifetime. Grossman lived through the revolutionary upheavals of the 1905 and 1917 Russian Revolutions (and the following revolutionary wave across Europe), the rise of fascism particularly in Germany, and the rise of Stalinism in Eastern Europe. As such, Henryk Grossman and the Recovery of Marxism is both a very personal and a political story, in many ways inspiring for Marxists today.
Grossman became a socialist at the age of 15 while still at school in Kraków. He remained a socialist at university and became deeply involved in fighting for the rights of Jewish workers, including during the mass strikes that broke out in Poland as a response to the 1905 Russian Revolution.
Originally a member of the Polish Social Democratic Party of Galicia and Silesia (PPSD), Grossman split from that party and formed the Jewish Social Democratic Party (JSDP) as a result of the PPSD’s failure to take seriously the question of the oppression of Jewish workers. In doing so, Grossman rejected the idea of a multi-ethnic revolutionary organization along the lines of the Bolsheviks in Russia. Kuhn’s discussion of these dynamics is masterly. He argues that the PPSD delivered Jewish workers into the hands of Zionism by failing to fight Jewish oppression, instead promising them a solution in the distant future under socialism. But Kuhn also argues that Grossman’s failure to take advantage of the 1905 upheavals to develop a Jewish, Polish and Ukrainian revolutionary organization that would fight seriously against the oppression of national minorities as part of the workers’ struggle was a mistake.
Grossman moved to Vienna in 1910 and largely dropped out of political activity. But the revolutionary struggles at the end of World War One saw Grossman re enter political life. It was also at this time that he first expressed his analysis of Marxist crisis theory, for which he is best known.
Grossman’s analysis of Marxist crisis theory builds upon and extends Marx. Developed in the context of the revolutionary struggles following the first World War and the 1917 Russian Revolution — and further extended through the 1920s and 1930s — Grossman used Marx’s discussions of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall to argue that economic crisis was inevitable under capitalism. Grossman also developed crisis theory by identifying a number of countervailing factors that can counteract the falling rate of profit, and thereby lessen the tendency towards crisis. These arguments contribute directly to the question of how to achieve socialism. As capitalism is inherently crisis-ridden, there can no question of capitalism continuing indefinitely. Thus the need to struggle for socialism is not just a moral argument. Instead, the struggle for socialism arises directly out of and is necessitated by the very logic of capitalism itself.
At this time, Grossman was living back in Poland and was a member of the underground Polish Communist Party. But in a reflection of the failure of revolutionary struggles across Europe to succeed in overthrowing capitalism, Grossman was imprisoned in 1924. He was only released on the condition that he leave Poland for Germany and abstain from political activity. Moving to Frankfurt, he joined the Institut für Sozialforschung (Institute for Social Research), also known as the Frankfurt school. Here he continued his development of Marxist theory, including writing his best-known work, The Law of Accumulation and Breakdown of the Capitalist System. However, his political activity dwindled as a consequence of his exile.
In the 1930s, Grossman — as a Jewish socialist living in Germany — was seriously threatened by the rise of fascism. He left Germany, once again heading into exile, and settled eventually in the United States, in New York where the Frankfurt School was then based. Kuhn’s discussion of Grossman’s life in New York is a very human one. He was expelled from the Institute in 1944 as a result of his staunch commitment to Marxism and workers’ struggle in the face of the Institute’s gradual rejection of Marxism. We read a poignant description of his poverty and ill-health. He was also depressed by news from Europe, where his estranged wife Janina, his son Jan, and his brother and sister-in law had all been murdered by the Nazis. However, throughout this, he ‘retained his old enthusiasm for ideas and politics’, as shown for example by his insistence on taking his library back to Germany to replace the works destroyed by the Nazis.
From the 1920s onwards, Grossman also had to deal with the destruction of the Russian revolution and the rise of the Stalinist bureaucracy in Russia. Kuhn’s biography clearly shows the turmoil and difficulties faced by Marxist revolutionaries after the demise of the Russian Revolution. Although for a time intensely critical of the Stalinist state in Russia, Grossman eventually came to support Stalin. Kuhn argues that Grossman’s shift from a genuine revolutionary position to a position of strong support for the Soviet Union has to be seen very much as a reaction to the times in which he was living. In particular, there was no strong socialist current showing an alternative to Stalinism and, at the same time, fascism was becoming increasingly strong around the world. Ultimately, Kuhn sees Grossman’s eventual acceptance of Stalin’s regime as a result of his belief that the Soviet Union was the only bulwark against fascism.
Towards the end of his life, in 1949 Grossman returned to East Germany, partly to escape McCarthyism in the United States and partly to make his ‘small contribution to the construction of a new better Germany’. He took up a professorship at the University of Leipzig and threw himself back into politics, teaching and social activity. But in his late 60s by now, Grossman had serious health problems and died in November 1950.
Kuhn’s meticulously researched, well-written and accessible biography is a really great read. But beyond that, it is itself a recovery of both Grossman’s own analyses and consequently of Marxism as well.
Grossman’s work was largely ignored and forgotten from his death until the German New Left rediscovered them in the context of the mass social struggles of the 1960s. His book The Law of Accumulation and Breakdown of the Capitalist System was not translated into English until 1979. Kuhn’s biography should be seen very much as a continuation of this recovery of Grossman’s theory and analysis.
Furthermore, Kuhn’s biography is also an important part of recovering Marxism itself. The widespread understanding that Stalinist Russia was socialist has tainted the Marxist tradition, associating it with bureaucracy, state ownership, lack of democracy and the horror of the police state. The recovery of the pre-Stalinist Marxist tradition, such as that represented by Grossman, is vital for the development of Marxist thought today. Kuhn’s biography of Henryk Grossman is an important contribution to this recovery.
Elinor Jean is an honours graduate in German from the Australian National University and is currently completing a Bachelor of Laws at the Australian National University.
Elinor Jean, ‘The Innovation of Henryk Grossman’s Marxism,’ A Review of Rick Kuhn, Henryk Grossman and the Recovery of Marxism.
Rick Kuhn, Henryk Grossman and the Recovery of Marxism. (Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 2007.)
In many ways, the second half of the title says it all: the recovery of Marxism.
Henryk Grossman (1881–1950) was a Marxist theorist and academic, who made an important contribution to the recognition and development of Marx’ economic theory. In addition, Kuhn’s biography is itself a recovery of both Grossman’s own analyses and consequently of Marxism as well.
Grossman was both a Marxist academic and a socialist activist. His life as a socialist to a very great extent mirrors the history of the socialist movement in his lifetime. Grossman lived through the revolutionary upheavals of the 1905 and 1917 Russian Revolutions (and the following revolutionary wave across Europe), the rise of fascism particularly in Germany, and the rise of Stalinism in Eastern Europe. As such, Henryk Grossman and the Recovery of Marxism is both a very personal and a political story, in many ways inspiring for Marxists today.
Grossman became a socialist at the age of 15 while still at school in Kraków. He remained a socialist at university and became deeply involved in fighting for the rights of Jewish workers, including during the mass strikes that broke out in Poland as a response to the 1905 Russian Revolution.
Originally a member of the Polish Social Democratic Party of Galicia and Silesia (PPSD), Grossman split from that party and formed the Jewish Social Democratic Party (JSDP) as a result of the PPSD’s failure to take seriously the question of the oppression of Jewish workers. In doing so, Grossman rejected the idea of a multi-ethnic revolutionary organization along the lines of the Bolsheviks in Russia. Kuhn’s discussion of these dynamics is masterly. He argues that the PPSD delivered Jewish workers into the hands of Zionism by failing to fight Jewish oppression, instead promising them a solution in the distant future under socialism. But Kuhn also argues that Grossman’s failure to take advantage of the 1905 upheavals to develop a Jewish, Polish and Ukrainian revolutionary organization that would fight seriously against the oppression of national minorities as part of the workers’ struggle was a mistake.
Grossman moved to Vienna in 1910 and largely dropped out of political activity. But the revolutionary struggles at the end of World War One saw Grossman re enter political life. It was also at this time that he first expressed his analysis of Marxist crisis theory, for which he is best known.
Grossman’s analysis of Marxist crisis theory builds upon and extends Marx. Developed in the context of the revolutionary struggles following the first World War and the 1917 Russian Revolution — and further extended through the 1920s and 1930s — Grossman used Marx’s discussions of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall to argue that economic crisis was inevitable under capitalism. Grossman also developed crisis theory by identifying a number of countervailing factors that can counteract the falling rate of profit, and thereby lessen the tendency towards crisis. These arguments contribute directly to the question of how to achieve socialism. As capitalism is inherently crisis-ridden, there can no question of capitalism continuing indefinitely. Thus the need to struggle for socialism is not just a moral argument. Instead, the struggle for socialism arises directly out of and is necessitated by the very logic of capitalism itself.
At this time, Grossman was living back in Poland and was a member of the underground Polish Communist Party. But in a reflection of the failure of revolutionary struggles across Europe to succeed in overthrowing capitalism, Grossman was imprisoned in 1924. He was only released on the condition that he leave Poland for Germany and abstain from political activity. Moving to Frankfurt, he joined the Institut für Sozialforschung (Institute for Social Research), also known as the Frankfurt school. Here he continued his development of Marxist theory, including writing his best-known work, The Law of Accumulation and Breakdown of the Capitalist System. However, his political activity dwindled as a consequence of his exile.
In the 1930s, Grossman — as a Jewish socialist living in Germany — was seriously threatened by the rise of fascism. He left Germany, once again heading into exile, and settled eventually in the United States, in New York where the Frankfurt School was then based. Kuhn’s discussion of Grossman’s life in New York is a very human one. He was expelled from the Institute in 1944 as a result of his staunch commitment to Marxism and workers’ struggle in the face of the Institute’s gradual rejection of Marxism. We read a poignant description of his poverty and ill-health. He was also depressed by news from Europe, where his estranged wife Janina, his son Jan, and his brother and sister-in law had all been murdered by the Nazis. However, throughout this, he ‘retained his old enthusiasm for ideas and politics’, as shown for example by his insistence on taking his library back to Germany to replace the works destroyed by the Nazis.
From the 1920s onwards, Grossman also had to deal with the destruction of the Russian revolution and the rise of the Stalinist bureaucracy in Russia. Kuhn’s biography clearly shows the turmoil and difficulties faced by Marxist revolutionaries after the demise of the Russian Revolution. Although for a time intensely critical of the Stalinist state in Russia, Grossman eventually came to support Stalin. Kuhn argues that Grossman’s shift from a genuine revolutionary position to a position of strong support for the Soviet Union has to be seen very much as a reaction to the times in which he was living. In particular, there was no strong socialist current showing an alternative to Stalinism and, at the same time, fascism was becoming increasingly strong around the world. Ultimately, Kuhn sees Grossman’s eventual acceptance of Stalin’s regime as a result of his belief that the Soviet Union was the only bulwark against fascism.
Towards the end of his life, in 1949 Grossman returned to East Germany, partly to escape McCarthyism in the United States and partly to make his ‘small contribution to the construction of a new better Germany’. He took up a professorship at the University of Leipzig and threw himself back into politics, teaching and social activity. But in his late 60s by now, Grossman had serious health problems and died in November 1950.
Kuhn’s meticulously researched, well-written and accessible biography is a really great read. But beyond that, it is itself a recovery of both Grossman’s own analyses and consequently of Marxism as well.
Grossman’s work was largely ignored and forgotten from his death until the German New Left rediscovered them in the context of the mass social struggles of the 1960s. His book The Law of Accumulation and Breakdown of the Capitalist System was not translated into English until 1979. Kuhn’s biography should be seen very much as a continuation of this recovery of Grossman’s theory and analysis.
Furthermore, Kuhn’s biography is also an important part of recovering Marxism itself. The widespread understanding that Stalinist Russia was socialist has tainted the Marxist tradition, associating it with bureaucracy, state ownership, lack of democracy and the horror of the police state. The recovery of the pre-Stalinist Marxist tradition, such as that represented by Grossman, is vital for the development of Marxist thought today. Kuhn’s biography of Henryk Grossman is an important contribution to this recovery.
Elinor Jean is an honours graduate in German from the Australian National University and is currently completing a Bachelor of Laws at the Australian National University.